Scottish National Theatre
The next item of business is the debate on motion S2M-406, in the name of Frank McAveety, on the Scottish national theatre, and two amendments to that motion.
I am delighted to speak on behalf of the Scottish Executive in support of our motion on a national theatre. Proposals for a national theatre have spent decades in the wings, with an expectant theatre sector and theatre audience eagerly awaiting their entry. However, like the ghost of Hamlet's father, the national theatre seemed destined never to achieve corporeal reality.
That said, over the past few years, the idea of a national theatre has moved dramatically from the periphery of many people's cultural vision to occupy the foreground of their concerns for the arts in Scotland. It has been emblematic of much of the debate about Scotland's identity and cultural future and about how, in a devolved Scotland, the arts can best contribute to our society and its cultural identity.
Members will be aware that we have recently had to address the difficulties that are faced by the Scottish theatre sector. They will recall how my predecessor, Mike Watson, intervened to ensure that the Executive responded to repertory theatre's concerns for stable funding packages to allow them to identify ways forward. Many people within and outwith the chamber—including Mike Russell, who was in the chamber in the previous parliamentary session but is now without it—expressed concerns about the effect of such support on our commitment to a national theatre. I know that Mr Russell is being grieved over at the SNP conference this very week.
Indeed, the future of the national theatre project was seen as a bell-wether of the future of the whole arts sector in Scotland. It is certainly important. After all, many individuals in this chamber, including colleagues such as Andy Kerr, experienced theatre and other forms of culture as part of their development and have utilised that experience to raise awareness of the importance of arts and culture in this country. Like Andy Kerr, I was in the audience in the early 1980s when Joe Corrie's "In Time o' Strife" was performed at the Citizens Theatre as part of the Clydebuilt series. During that time of pessimism, the play told us that we must keep faith. One character says:
"Keep up your he'rts, my laddies … for there's nae power on earth can crush the men that can sing on a day like this."
We kept up that enthusiasm, commitment and energy for theatre over the years when doing so was not fashionable. The Conservative Government had 18 years in which to address the issue of a national theatre and I await with interest the speeches from Jamie McGrigor, Ted Brocklebank and Brian Monteith; I acknowledge that they are cultured individuals who often display their cultural awareness, but it is a great pity that their party did not display such awareness over the 18 years when it had to make certain decisions.
Like Brian Monteith and others, we felt that we had to address the issue and have confidence in our approach. Many people probably felt like the King in Robert McLellan's play "Jamie the Saxt", who, after his pessimism during the drama, says:
‘Gie me a dram! I hae been gey near shot doun, hackit to bits, and stained to daith!'
That is not a description of the SNP conference; it is a quote from Scottish drama of the past.
I hope that those members and commentators will raise a glass today and join me in celebrating the securing of a national theatre of Scotland and in welcoming the robust return to health of the regional theatres that are so crucial to its future. Those theatres have gone through much over the past few years and have seen substantial changes in personnel. Individuals such as Clive Perry, Hamish Glen, Kenny Ireland, Giles Havergal and his colleagues Robert MacDonald and Philip Prowse kept alive the dreams of theatre in Pitlochry and Dundee and at the Royal Lyceum Theatre and the Citizens Theatre in Glasgow and put together a package of drama that enthralled Scottish audiences for decades. Although they are off centre stage in the debate on the future of theatre in Scotland, they have been influential in shaping that debate over the past 20 or more years. I thank those talented individuals for their outstanding contribution to Scottish theatre and wish them well in their future careers. I have no doubt that many of them will contribute ideas to the development of a national theatre.
Those people have been replaced by a younger generation of artistic directors. I welcome them all, particularly TAG Theatre Company's new artistic director, Emily Grey. I hope that that appointment portends that women will have a central role in the artistic direction of many of our repertory theatres over the next few years.
Since the Minister for Finance and Public Services, Andy Kerr, made the announcement about a national theatre a few weeks ago, people have said that it is one of the most significant developments in Scottish arts and culture in recent generations. I am confident that we can move it forward. We proposed the idea in our 1999 Scottish Parliament manifesto and it is one of the key commitments in the partnership agreement.
We have made that great commitment partly because we have been listening to voices in the theatre world. For example, Gerry Mulgrew once said:
"There's no tradition of theatre in Scotland, so why not make one?"
We have an opportunity to shape and influence such a tradition. Like many artistic statements, that is up for disputation, and I am sure that that will be a feature of the debate. We have an opportunity to shape a national theatre that suits Scotland and the cultural landscape in which we operate.
Only a few weeks back, the opening paragraph of an article in The Guardian read as follows:
"Last week, two announcements were made about national theatres. One was in Edinburgh, the other in New York. One was radical and forward-looking, the other tired and old-fashioned. Curiously, it is little old Scotland, not New York, where the agenda is being set."
I quite like the sound of those words.
I pay tribute to the work of all my predecessors with responsibility for the cultural portfolio—Mike Watson, Rhona Brankin, Allan Wilson and Sam Galbraith—who have all tried to ensure that we put culture at the heart of the debate in Scotland. I have had the opportunity to make the announcement this afternoon, but without their help and assistance in the past it would not have been possible. I also thank the Federation of Scottish Theatre for its work throughout the consultation process. Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, the federation kept alive the dream through its commitment to a national theatre. That dream has now been realised, thanks to the commitment of those individuals whose voluntary efforts kept the idea alive.
As I said, the national theatre will be just that. It will be the national theatre of Scotland, its responsibility will be to the people of Scotland and it will be their theatre.
The minister has, understandably, paid due congratulations to the work of past ministers, but I have not yet heard him congratulate the Education, Culture and Sport Committee on its work and, in particular, on the evidence that it took from the Federation of Scottish Theatre, which allowed the commissioning model to be proposed and to be supported in a report that gained cross-party support in the Parliament. Will the minister comment on that? Will he also explain why he continues to talk about a national theatre, when one of the recommendations of that report was that it should be called a national theatre company, to ensure that people think that we are not talking about a building but rather about a commissioning organisation?
I thank Brian Monteith for his visionary intervention. Having been a member of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, I pay tribute to the individuals who redefined the issue by making submissions to the former ministers to ensure that the matter was kept on the agenda and that they could deliver on the commitment that many people had made.
Although I am using the term "national theatre", I reaffirm that, as Brian Monteith said, the national theatre will be not a building, but an entity that will exist in communities throughout Scotland. Rather than being prescriptive about exactly how that will evolve, I feel that that is part of the development process and I look forward to hearing intelligent and coherent contributions to that debate from Brian Monteith and many others in the future.
Donald Campbell once said that he wanted an audience to go to a play as they would go to a pub, or to church, or to a pop concert, or to a football game or to play snooker. It should be natural to assume that theatre is an activity that people will want to partake of among all their cultural choices. That is right and proper and we need to aim for that ambition.
The Education, Culture and Sport Committee said that a national theatre must speak for new generations and for people in the coming generations, particularly young people, who have a right to feel that theatre belongs to them as much as it belongs to those who have claimed ownership of it in the past. We are committed to working in partnership with the youth theatre network, existing rep theatres and local theatre groups. We are also committed to recognising the importance of the different languages of Scotland to ensure that the communities that have kept alive their own theatrical and language traditions can shape and influence the new national theatre. Alasdair Morrison and I had a good discussion earlier today about how to address issues within the Gaelic community to ensure that Gaelic speakers are as centrally involved as other people in Scotland.
We must aim for the very best in theatrical and writing talent, and we must ensure that theatre is widely accessible across Scotland. There are incredible levels of talent in Scotland, much of which is already showcased here, as is evidenced by the fact that many successful dramas that were staged during the Edinburgh festival are now touring other parts of Scotland. We must ensure that we move forward dramatically, to support the words of Jim Haynes, who founded the Traverse Theatre in Edinburgh. He said:
"The Traverse isn't in Scotland, it's in the world."
We want a national theatre that rightly takes its place within the world as a national theatre company and we want to ensure that that is done in partnership with the other commitments that we have made.
Many people have commented about the Executive's commitment to cultural activity. The national theatre is one example of the Executive's commitment. Other examples include the Donald Dewar arts awards, for which a £5 million trust fund has been set up; more than £3 million for schools' cultural co-ordinators; and £17.5 million, committed in the partnership deal, to additional music tuition in schools. That funding is all focused on developing and nurturing the talent of young people. The young boy or girl who is now sitting in a school somewhere in Scotland is the young man or woman whom we think will perform in theatres throughout Scotland and will help to build the theatre community throughout our nation. Children and young people are central to the national theatre. That is why I am delighted to have the advice of Bryan Beattie, who has had experience centrally with the Scottish Youth Theatre, to try to shape and influence the development of the national theatre.
The national theatre of Scotland belongs to the people of Scotland. That is why I am delighted to announce that the future administrative office for the national theatre of Scotland will not be in an existing theatre in a large city—it will not even be in an office block in a city centre. We commit ourselves to locate the national theatre in the major new campus that is being developed in the Greater Easterhouse area in Glasgow. That commitment recognises that that community, along with many other communities, has put arts at the centre of its regeneration.
I am in discussion with the management committee in the Greater Easterhouse area to develop the concept within the location of the area's arts factory. It will take a year and a half to two years to finalise that building. In the interim, we will use an office space—exactly where is still to be determined—in Glasgow city centre as the administrative base. It is right and proper that we demonstrate the Executive's commitment to working with communities throughout Scotland to make a difference.
Unlike the tramps in Beckett's "Waiting for Godot", we are no longer waiting for something that never comes. We now have the opportunity to seek the solutions for ourselves. It is our theatre; the theatre of Scotland, for Scotland.
I move,
That the Parliament welcomes the announcement of Scottish Executive funding to realise the National Theatre of Scotland; commends the Executive on its vision in supporting the radical concept of a commissioning theatre of national and international status to present theatrical and writing excellence to all the people of Scotland and take Scotland's creative talent to the world stage, and endorses the Executive's commitment to the infrastructure of Scottish regional theatre from which new work will come.
When I told a local teacher in Argyll that I was making a speech on the national theatre, he said, "Do you mean that Holyrood building farce? That is the biggest tragi-comedy of all time." Perhaps that is why the national theatre will not entail the erection of a building.
Seriously, it is a bit much for the Executive to commend itself and pat itself on the back for producing the funding for a national theatre out of the underspend. People have been campaigning for a national theatre for years and the Executive has had an underspend every year. Why has Scottish theatre had to wait for so long? It is not as though any extra money was going on the arts. The funding for the Scottish Arts Council has stood still, as has the funding for most cultural work in Scotland, despite all Labour's promises.
Rather than patting itself on the back, the Executive should pat the backs of those who have campaigned relentlessly for 60 years to achieve a national theatre. I take my hat off to those people, although they may be disappointed that no bricks or mortar are attached to the project and that it will not have its own theatre company. It will, according to the SAC briefing, be a commissioning body that will put on a minimum of three to five productions per year in venues throughout Scotland.
I am glad that the target market includes the world of education and training; to bring theatre to children is to bring them a great gift. High-quality training for actors and other theatre professionals is vital. However, why is it the intention to target local authorities? I am not sure that they would consider themselves experts in theatre. We are told by the SAC that the national theatre of Scotland has similarities with the Swedish model. I point out that the three key principles that underpin the Swedish theatre are the voluntary dimension of its governance, which keeps the theatre close to audiences; its willingness to listen and find out what is happening in the country and what audiences want; and, most important, its independence from the state and from local authorities. It may be sensible to include some local authority officers on local committees to promote and arrange performances, but never to decide what is to be shown—that is for theatre professionals.
We are told that First Minister Jack McConnell is scared witless that the national theatre will somehow give extra credence to the Scottish National Party. How utterly ridiculous—one only has to look at the SNP's position in the polls after its championing of "Braveheart" and its attachment to the well-known thespian and absentee lift attendant, Sir Sean Connery. I do not know why Jack McConnell is worried. Arts policy and an independent Scotland are two totally different things.
On the subject of independence, it is true that the Czech National Theatre helped to sustain that proud and independent people in their desperate fight against the Austro-Hungarian empire and later against the brutal totalitarian regime of the Soviet Union.
The Czechs' theatre was always based on excellence. The love of theatre in that part of the world was so great that the theatre building—which was built in 1881 and was the most excellent piece of architecture in Prague—was financed by contributions from the populace and 21 foundation stones were brought from different parts of Bohemia and Moravia. The people had a great wish to be part of the project.
Despite the original building being burnt out, it was refurbished within two years, again with public donations. We should note that the reason for the success of Czech theatre is that the Czechs have always had first-class, highly trained actors and actresses and good stage designers, and their repertoires have always been of the highest order in combining the classical with the contemporary and the national with the international. Having Mozart as a patron has helped, but the Czechs have always striven for excellence, which has produced a great national interest and pride in theatre. It would be wonderful if Scotland could do the same.
Recently, the well-known journalist Jenny Hjul wrote an excellent article in The Sunday Times on the Scottish national theatre. She said:
"As Scottish Opera proved with its production of Wagner's Ring Cycle excellence alone will put Scotland on the map. That must be the National Theatre's priority."
She is right. Scottish Opera is now being talked about as a rival to Covent Garden.
Excellence and quality must be looked on as goals to be sought by all and elitism should not be seen as a dirty word. As Eddie Friel, the chief executive of the Greater Glasgow and Clyde Valley Tourist Board, said about opera:
"Elitism is sometimes used as a derogatory term. That is an abuse of language. There is nothing wrong with striving to be the best."
What kind of theatre will Scotland get? We should hope that, although it has secured Government funding, it will not be beholden to any Government's politically correct agenda or feel obliged to fulfil a quota that is geared towards special interest lobbies. As Ian Rankin, the author of the Inspector Rebus novels, said:
"I think artists should feel free to express themselves. I don't believe that before they start painting or creating they should have to ask themselves: How does this fit in with the Executive's stance on social inclusion?"
That does not mean that playwrights from special interest groups should not write plays, but that they must write excellent plays. Is there a Gaelic writer out there who can produce a new spectacular Gaelic musical to sweep across Scotland and then the world? That would really help the Gaelic cause and preserve the Gaelic language. I throw out that challenge to the Gaelic community.
Rather than impinging on regional theatres, the national theatre must inspire other dramatic companies in Scotland and must showcase all that is good in writing, acting, lighting, set and costume design, direction and production to domestic and international audiences. The national theatre must reinvigorate new interest in theatre in Scotland and must produce thundering performances of plays such as Liz Lochhead's "Medea", David Hare and Howard Brenton's "Pravda" and Arthur Miller's "The Crucible", to name a few. What about Shakespeare's Scottish play? That has certainly stood the test of time.
The motto that is emblazoned on the curtain of the Czech theatre is:
"To the nation for itself".
That reminds all Czechs of the wonderful present that they once gave to themselves. We should make Scotland's national theatre a present of equal value.
I move amendment S2M-406.2, to leave out from "commends" to end and insert:
"recognises that this is the culmination of a sixty-year campaign for a National Theatre Company; regrets the Executive's past failure to deliver on its promises despite repeated underspends in its budget, and hopes that this commissioning body will produce theatre of such excellence and quality that theatre-going audiences will be captivated and enlarged in Scotland and that it will bring greater understanding of theatre to all corners of Scotland, provide inspiration and opportunity for actors, writers, designers and production staff to showcase their talents and provide greater cultural entertainment and enjoyment for present and future generations of local inhabitants and visitors."
I welcome the minister's announcement. In the spirit of both previous speeches, I offer a quote from the poet Alan Riach, which puts matters in context. In The Scotsman recently, Alan Riach quoted an Irish prime minister:
"Arts are the genius of your country, and the key with which you unlock that genius is education."
The £7.5 million that the minister has announced for a national theatre of Scotland over the next two years is, although long in the yearning, nonetheless welcome.
I am part of a generation that grew up hugely influenced by theatre. One of my earliest political memories was a production of "The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil" by the 7:84 Theatre Company. I also remember growing up under the influence of the Wildcat Theatre Company, which constantly took its productions around communities in Lanarkshire—where I lived—in the 1980s and 1990s. I am heartened that the minister sees that company as the model that the national theatre of Scotland will develop in due course.
As the minister said, Scotland has wonderful theatrical talent in the form of actors, writers, directors, designers and production staff. I am sure that they look forward to the challenge that has been posed to each of them to reach the highest standards of excellence in the work that the national theatre of Scotland will present.
I hope that the minister accepts that my comments are made in a spirit of constructive criticism. I hope that the national theatre strives for excellence today and tomorrow by encouraging the younger generation of Scots to get involved in theatre both on the stage and in the audience. That is an awesome challenge and I hope that the national theatre of Scotland rises to it.
As the minister will be aware, the Scottish Socialist Party wants a doubling of the overall arts budget. We believe that that is not only necessary but possible. We want a Scotland where we have enough bread and enough roses. As the minister will know, spending on the arts in the city of Berlin is 10 times the amount that is spent on the arts throughout Scotland. I invite him to consider the attitude in Dublin, which regards art and culture as an economic driver. I hope that he will take on board those examples. We have waited a long time for a national theatre, but we can still learn a great deal from other places.
The buzz from a live orchestra, from excellence in drama and from beauty and art, and the stimulus from culture are enormously powerful sensations. However, the truth is that insufficient is done to take the buzz to the Bailliestons and Broomhouses of this world. I welcome the minister's announcement that the national theatre's administrative centre will be in Easterhouse. That is the right signal to send out.
May I just say in the 30 seconds that I have left—I am surprised that that is all the time that I have—that I visited the Holyrood site of the new Parliament building. I am sure that there is a parallel between those who waited 60 years for a national theatre and those who waited 60 years for a parliament. In the video presentation of Mr Miralles's design ideas, I was struck by the concept of architecture as an art form and the vision that we can get from art. I was also struck by the vision at the end of the presentation of Mr Miralles and his partner in their own house. I look forward to a society where we each have a unique house that is designed by architects. We were all struck by that vision, which is part and parcel of the same vision that I hope the national theatre of Scotland offers for the future.
I move amendment S2M-406.1, to leave out from "commends" to end and insert:
"believes that the success of this radical concept of a commissioning theatre presenting theatrical and writing excellence to all the people of Scotland and the world will in part be measured by greater involvement in the theatre and access to productions by the people of Scotland both regionally and locally."
The debate feels curiously flat, which surprises me because I thought that there might be a little more enthusiasm for what has finally happened after 60 years. I say to Colin Fox that I hope that we all recognise culture's economic importance to Scotland. I do not believe that there is anyone in the chamber who is not perfectly well aware of the vital contribution that is made the length and breadth of Scotland—and to the rest of the world—by all parts of our arts and culture.
If Jamie McGrigor's speech was anything by which to judge, the Tories are already drafting their condemnatory press releases for the first modern and innovative piece to be staged by the national theatre of Scotland. His speech seemed to be a rather bizarre contribution to what I had hoped was going to be a slightly more enthusiastic debate.
The Scottish National Party has long supported the establishment of a national theatre for Scotland. The national theatre debate seemed to start at about the same time as the SNP came into being. That may not be a coincidence because I know that long-gone nationalists—I am not talking about Mike Russell—were enthusiastic proponents of a national theatre and were involved in the debate all the way along.
Scotland has a wealth of theatrical talent. A national theatre will be a wonderful outlet for the expression of our national culture and it will be able to showcase our theatrical talent. I hope that the national theatre will tour abroad. We should consider that point. Liz Lochhead said:
"If we are a nation and not just a region, we don't have to apologise for it, it is something to celebrate … And the national theatre is something to celebrate."
It is a pity that, like almost every sector in Scottish life, theatre has suffered from Scotland's curse—emigration—with the loss of some of our brightest and best in the past few years. I hope that the establishment of the national theatre will begin to reverse that.
The national theatre project has the potential to be of great benefit to Scotland and I hope that it will acknowledge the importance of encouraging young people in the arts. It can be a showcase for Scottish talent young and old, established and emerging, so I hope that there are plans to ensure that that is exactly what happens. It is also extremely important that the national theatre encourage interface with the traditional arts and all the languages of Scotland.
I am encouraged that the theatre is to be a commissioning body and that it will tour the country. I know that a large part of the debate in the past has centred on whether we should have a theatre in the sense of a purpose-built building with a chiselled granite thing over the top that says "The National Theatre for Scotland". That it is a commissioning theatre rather than one that is rooted in bricks and mortar should be a constant reminder that theatre can be staged anywhere. I will soon attend an open-air event at the Hermitage in Dunkeld called "The Enchanted Forest", which I believe may already be sold out. The success of the piece, which has been staged before—if staged is the right word for something that the audience moves through, rather than sits and watches—is absolute proof, if any were needed, that there is an audience for innovation in Scotland if we take it to them.
Innovation is what will be important about the national theatre that we are setting in train for Scotland. Restagings of the classics of Scottish and world theatre have a place, but our national theatre must foster national creativity and produce work that can be taken to the smallest village hall in the land as well as to the larger venues, or that can be staged under the trees, if that is appropriate. I hope that there will be a good balance between old and new work, and I look forward to seeing some of that new work.
It is regrettable that it has taken us this long to get to this stage. As tempting as it is to blame the Government it can, in truth, hardly be taken to task for the final four years' wait, given that there was a 60-year wait in total. I look forward to future debates with the new Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport—this is the first that we have had, I think. I know that his enthusiasm for the arts, although it matches mine, might not completely overlap with my interests. I hope therefore that, in future, our debates will be a bit more generally enthusiastic.
Part of getting the project right is to ensure that financial support does not ignore or, worse, exacerbate the serious problems that face regional theatre throughout Scotland. Funding levels for theatre in Scotland have been falling behind those in England. In December 2002, The Scotsman reported that the average grant to a grade 1 theatre in England and Wales was £1.35 million, compared to an average of £792,100 for Scotland's two leading theatres, but I know that the minister has genuine concerns about regional theatre. Smaller theatres, such as Perth Theatre in my constituency, get less than £300,000 annually, which compares with an average of between £441,254 and £585,749 for equivalents in England. I notice that the minister did not include Perth Theatre in his list of regional theatres. I hope that he will keep it in mind that it is an important small theatre in Scotland. Perhaps I can invite him to visit it some day.
I know that problems in the funding of regional theatre have already led to the diversion of £1 million that was earmarked for the national theatre and I know that the minister is concerned about regional theatre. I hope that we do not end up robbing Peter to pay Paul, because that would be a great shame. Funding in future must be secure, but I have some concern about the funding plans. I am pleased that £7.5 million has been found for the next two years from the end-year flexibility funds, but I know that that is not a source of finance that can be guaranteed in future. The national theatre must not be expected to depend on whatever the Minister for Finance and Public Services can come up with after his annual rummage around in the back of the Executive sofa, especially as I have considerably less confidence in the commitment of the Minister for Finance and Public Services to the arts and culture than I have in the commitment of the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport.
There is an argument that suggests that we cannot aspire to have decent culture as well as, for example, free personal care for the elderly. That must be quite wrong. Iain Reekie, head of drama and performance at Queen Margaret University College in Edinburgh, said that he regarded that argument as "daft". I note that Denmark and Finland allocate 16 times as much public money to their theatres as Scotland does to its theatres. I hope that we start to consider a level of funding that begins to approach what is provided in other parts of the world.
I will give the final word to Brian Cox, that well-known Scottish thespian, who was quoted in The Scotsman on 21 December 2002. He said:
"You have got to be able to nourish your own talent, acknowledge the extraordinary work people have done and not to have a hand-to-mouth situation … we have been under the yoke of an English Parliament for 300 years"—
I stress that these are not my words; I am quoting somebody else—
"and I think we have to get out of this negative mentality. We have had discussion about a national theatre for at least ten years."
Enough said.
I commend what is being done, and I commend the decisions that have been taken by the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport. I look forward to many more such decisions in the future.
I, too, congratulate the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport on achieving—we hope—what a lot of people have been working for. I know that the debate goes back a long time, but the present move for a Scottish national theatre of the commissioning variety started, at least publicly, at a meeting that was held at the Royal Lyceum Theatre about five years ago. The people who promoted it then have withstood quite a lot of criticism and have taken something of a battering, but they have kept on with it. They have persuaded everyone—they have certainly persuaded our party, which featured the policy in its manifesto—that a national theatre for Scotland based on the model that was proposed by the Federation of Scottish Theatre is desirable. It figured in the partnership agreement, and the minister is now acting on that, which is very welcome. I hope that the theatre will be the success that it should be.
There are issues on several levels. There are the traditional, larger theatres and the need to provide a good product in those. During the many years when I was on the board of the Royal Lyceum Theatre, it annoyed me that, four weeks after we had put on a really good show, the show would close and everyone else involved went home. If such shows had toured, many people in Glasgow, Aberdeen or Perth, for example, would have been able to enjoy them. Likewise, we in Edinburgh could have enjoyed good productions from Perth Theatre or the Citizens Theatre, for example. The idea of having a really good product and touring it around is very good. That would attract the top names, because it would provide stable jobs for quite a number of weeks, going round the whole of Scotland. It would be an attractive proposition for people to contribute to the national theatre of Scotland as well as doing their bit in London or Holyrood—I mean Hollywood. That way, those really big names could give something back to Scottish theatre.
The next level involves shows touring round halls or other places that are not professional theatres. We are fairly bad at doing that at the moment. Some companies have done that well, but that is not the case on the whole. I know from representing Central Scotland that a small-scale touring opera might go to Kirkwall and Dumfries, but not to Lanarkshire. If we take up that point, we get told that people from Lanarkshire are expected to go to either Glasgow or Edinburgh. We must address that issue of theatre going to areas where there are currently no professional theatre performances.
One way in which to achieve that, which has been successfully done elsewhere, is to provide a tent or similar structure that can be erected inside a sports hall, for example. That can give the right atmosphere for a theatre and can offer a standard performing space. It would be worth funding such facilities as a way in which to get the national theatre going on a smaller scale. It is not a question of lesser quality, but of putting on smaller plays that involve casts of three or four, as opposed to putting on bigger plays that the bigger theatres can accommodate.
Will the member join me in congratulating the Coalfield Communities Federation for doing exactly that? In an article, the federation writes:
"The investment in our drama project is funded by the East Ayrshire coalfield area social inclusion partnership".
That partnership has taken a specific arts and drama project into that area. It is the kind of project that we in the Scottish Parliament ought to encourage.
There are good examples of projects such as the one to which Helen Eadie refers and we must encourage more of them in an organised way.
We could examine whether our future Parliament building—about which many of us have different views—could be used as a venue for arts performances; it will be empty each weekend. We could repay Scottish taxpayers somewhat for their great contribution to the Holyrood building by giving greater access to it for performance, arts, crafts and other activities of that sort.
The third level is to encourage communities to perform in their own ways. There is quite a lot of existing good work in community arts, but it needs much more encouragement and development. Many people have a mental barrier about performing arts and believe that the arts are not for them. We must somehow break down that barrier and work with communities; I hope that the new Scottish national theatre will help us to do that.
Finally, we must not reduce funding for regional drama companies. That funding must remain and increase but musicians, artists and writers also need funding. We must not rob Peter to pay Paul. The arts budget must support adequately all those activities including the new national theatre.
Today is a good day for Scotland and I hope that it will be an even better day when the first performers take to the stage.
The last time that I was involved in a debate on theatre in Scotland was on 12 February. That was a much less happy occasion and I was here in a different capacity. At that time, the Executive had to make hard choices regarding the future of theatre. Before we were able to make this welcome progress on the national theatre, urgent steps had to be taken to support the infrastructure of regional theatre. As a result, £3.5 million was allocated in 2002 and another £1 million earlier this year to strengthen regional theatre. Unfortunately, that included £3 million of the £5 million that was originally earmarked for the national theatre. However, as we reflect on that, it is worth recalling what Hamish Glen said in February 2002:
"it is only right that we sort out the historic problems within the existing theatre network first, since the plans for the new organisation will build on this."
The announcement that the Minister for Finance and Public Services made in September about the allocation of £3.5 million in 2004-05 and a further £4 million in the following year was welcome. That allocation is larger than the amount that was sought by the steering group that Dr Donald Smith chaired and, indeed, it is larger than the Scottish Executive's initial allocation. That is extremely welcome.
Members have noted that the allocation covers only two years. However, there will of course be another spending review in 2004 and I have every confidence in the minister's ability to fight for enduring funds to support the national theatre in the years to follow.
However welcome the money is, £7.5 million is not a large amount compared with many of the sums in the budget lines that we discussed in our debate on the draft budget earlier this month. As with much of the creative sector, investments of very—or relatively—small amounts of money in the theatre can make a significant difference and generate substantial results. It is significant that the money that has been allocated can both meet the aspirations that the theatre sector has had for 60 years and fulfil a commitment that was made in the national cultural strategy.
I was a little surprised by Jamie McGrigor's speech, in which he seemed to criticise the Executive for taking too long to do something. In fact, it was the Labour-Liberal Democrat Executive in the first session of the Scottish Parliament that produced the first-ever cultural strategy for Scotland. For years, the cultural sector had been asking for that but, in their 18 years in Government, the Conservatives did not deliver it. It is through that commitment that initiatives such as the national theatre are coming to pass.
The national theatre will be a body that will commission our best writers, actors and directors and will tour their works of excellence throughout Scotland and beyond. I hope that theatres such as the Theatre Royal in Dumfries—an ancient theatre, which Robert Burns attended, although it is no longer in the form that it was when he did so—will be able to attract funding so that they can be rebuilt and transformed into venues that are capable of putting on the sort of performances that the national theatre will produce. People in Dumfries and Galloway need to be able to see those performances locally. Of course, it is great to go to Ayr, Edinburgh and Glasgow, but I feel strongly that people should be able to see works of excellence in their communities. As Colin Fox said, the inspiration that seeing such works can give to young people and communities is important.
I know that there are no philistines in the chamber at the moment and I hope that there are outwith the Scottish Parliament no philistines who begrudge even the small amount of money that we are talking about going into the arts. Culture, in its broader sense, means not only drama, art and music but includes sport, language and popular music. In that regard, other members of the Education Committee and I visited a school yesterday in Edinburgh and saw a music lesson that involved youngsters in secondary 3 writing raps and creating music to rap to. That is also part of Scottish culture and our voice today.
Culture and creative activity contribute a great deal to the quality of our lives, on individual and national levels, and to the sense that we have of ourselves and our society. Scotland's cultural identity is strong internationally and the excellent work that will be commissioned by the national theatre will enhance our image outside Scotland. It will add to our reputation for excellence and quality and will attract visitors to our nation. Indeed, I hope that our having a strong and vibrant cultural sector might assist in the First Minister's goal of attracting people to work in Scotland and retaining people in the country after they have been trained here.
The conditions and the aspirations of Scotland—snapshots in time—will be understood by future generations through performance of the new works that will be commissioned by the national theatre, long after we politicians have been forgotten. Charles James Fox—who I do not think is a relative of our Colin Fox—said of our profession that we go up like a rocket and down like a stick. I am sure that we all hope that we are not in the stick phase at the moment, but the point is that we will not be remembered. The arts are not like that; good art exists for generations and informs other generations about the experiences and influences of the past.
Mr Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
The Scottish National Party is happy to welcome the commitment, at long last, to establish a national theatre.
It is important to recognise that much of the canon of great Scottish plays has been performed in many places. I have seen "The Wallace" and "Ane Satyre of the Thrie Estaitis" in this chamber. I saw "The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil" in a small hall in Oban. In 1967, I saw the Citizen's Theatre production of "The Anatomist" by James Bridie. Many such works are performed in theatres around the country. The idea of a commissioning theatre is absolutely correct, because our national theatre has to create the kind of works that are in the canon of Scotland's great theatrical heritage.
I am surprised to hear some people say that Scotland does not have a theatrical heritage, because that heritage goes back a long way. In the modern world, that heritage has helped to carry the aspirations of our people to have a distinctly recognised culture. The new national theatre has to be able to match up to that.
The minister said that there would be a commitment right across Scotland; he will have to consider how existing theatre companies can fit into our new aspirations. There has been a flourishing of Highland theatre in the past 10 years—Mull Theatre, the Gaelic theatre company Tosg, and also the Grey Coast Theatre Company in Caithness have produced original works that should be seen throughout Scotland. Some of their productions have already been seen abroad. However, the way in which theatre is structured at present means that touring money for companies from the far north is almost non-existent. The split in the organisation of Highlands and Islands Enterprise's offshoot HI-Arts—Highlands and Islands Arts Ltd—which has a budget for some touring, means that it is almost impossible to take more than one tour out of the Highlands every year. It could cost £120,000 or £130,000 for Grey Coast to tour the central belt.
If the national theatre is to address the kind of problems that existing regional theatre has, it will have to find the funding to allow excellent plays such as the kind that George Gunn has produced over the past 10 years. I am thinking particularly of "Farm Land", which I saw recently, and "51 Pegasus". Those productions tackle universal issues and ask challenging questions about emigration. They would be relevant in Lanarkshire, in Dumfries or wherever in Scotland. To make plays like those available in the context of the national theatre will require rejigging of current funding. Ideas will have to develop: commissioning can attempt to revisit some of our classics, but it should also provide for new productions of some of the excellent work that has been produced in Scotland in recent times, but which has had only limited audiences.
If small companies such as Grey Coast have been able to make international contacts with the likes of the National Theatre of Iceland, and if Scottish work can be performed in Brittany, Ireland or Norway, we will have to consider the capacity of the national theatre to enhance that existing work as well provide for the new items that will be commissioned in due course.
I ask the minister to consider carefully how the national theatre's creative budget will be used to try to release works of the sort that I have mentioned. They are part of the reason why it is now possible for us to say that we can have a vibrant theatre for Scotland. We will miss out on many of the artists who could allow Scotland's national culture to flourish if they are not involved, or if they are not liberated from their present financial constraints. We should try to stop the culture brain-drain from Scotland. The smaller companies must be fitted into the national theatre concept.
In the past, people have been forced to go and work in England, America or wherever. I was tempted to say at the beginning of the whole debate on the national theatre that people such as David Niven were the sort of Scots who went to America. However, there are also plenty of people in this generation who have been forced abroad.
Can we ensure that people who take a course on touring theatre—such as that offered at the North Highland College in Thurso, which will eventually become a degree course—will be able to find jobs in the national theatre? Will the minister honour his pledge that the national theatre will not only tour the whole of Scotland but draw in talent from the whole of Scotland? We have that talent in abundance. It has been exhibited to great effect, if only locally, in the past.
I find the project for a national theatre in Scotland a most exciting one, with its promise to be a theatre for the whole country and with its promise of support for regional and community theatre. I have some small experience on the boards myself as an amateur player in a Gaelic-learners drama group. I will give members a demonstration later if they wish, but not in front of this audience.
I was also an English teacher with the job of encouraging pupils to participate in drama in school. I rejoice at the fact that the national theatre will pay particular attention to youth theatre. I found that when drama companies came into schools providing workshops for pupils, it was of great benefit to the shy, diffident or disaffected pupils. It gave them the opportunity to engage with their feelings and their fellows through role-play and group performance.
A highlight was a visit to the Highlands by the Royal Shakespeare Company with such stars as Philip Madoc, who not only performed "Measure for Measure" and "The Blue Angel" in a tent in a car park in Dingwall over four evenings, but spent their days tutoring pupils in drama techniques. The event was brilliant. It was sponsored by BT, because there were not enough public funds.
It is not a bad idea to get the private sector involved in youth theatre. I was recently at a youth production sponsored by Shell, which sponsors such productions annually, in the Lyceum. I urge others in Scotland to get behind theatre, particularly young people's theatre, so that young people are exposed regularly to the highest-quality drama possible.
Young people love drama once they relax into it. There are magnificent examples of drama productions that schools put on in collaboration with community theatre companies. Rob Gibson mentioned the Grey Coast Theatre company, which next week will stage a community drama epic in Wick, in which 250 primary school pupils are taking part. Other such productions are being put on in the Highlands.
Eden Court in Inverness has a special place in Highland culture, offering a wide range of music and dance in the Highland capital. It also brings drama companies into schools and its outreach team has built up a service to schools and young people throughout the Highlands, not only developing drama skills but exploring through drama—in Gaelic as well as English—a wide range of social issues that are relevant to children's lives. That work has always been highly valued and I hope that the new national theatre will build on what has already been delivered.
The Highlands are well served by half a dozen theatre companies, one of which is the Traverse in Edinburgh. As other members have said, there is a long tradition of companies touring the village halls, from Oban to Ullapool to Ardross. I hope that the national theatre will attract back to Scotland the talents of many actors and that it will tour to such venues, even if only for limited seasons. The vision of Brian Cox or Ewan McGregor performing in a tent in Dingwall would be magic.
I want ordinary kids to feel comfortable about going to the theatre. Exposure to school drama does not always translate into bums on seats in theatres. Youngsters should feel that they can go to the theatre as naturally as they would go to the cinema or 10-pin bowling. They should also feel that they can be performers and not just audience members.
The issue is about social inclusion and equal opportunities. In school, I found it difficult to persuade boys to join the drama club. I want the national theatre to consider how we can involve young boys in drama and engage youngsters from the more disadvantaged sectors of our society. That is most important; theatre must be not just for the present theatre-going classes, but for all. I want the best classical and modern theatre to become accessible to all, from Shakespeare to Liz Lochhead to the exciting new writers—in Gaelic as well as English—who are waiting in the wings.
I hope that the Scottish national theatre will commission and encourage new writers and support those who are already writing. I wish it all the success in the world. I appreciate and welcome what has happened.
I endorse what has already been said; this is a great day for the theatre in Scotland. I confess to a slight disappointment with the minister's roll-call of Scotland's theatres. Along with Perth Theatre, he omitted to mention the Byre Theatre in St Andrews, of which I am a board member. The minister will recognise that the Byre is one of Scotland's most venerable and unique theatres. It was founded more than 70 years ago by local journalist Alex Paterson and its first home was in a cowshed in Abbey Street. Those who have had the privilege of visiting our beautiful new theatre will testify that it is not only an outpost of cultural civilisation in the wilds of north-east Fife, but a five-star Scottish tourist attraction. We are grateful to the national lottery, the Scottish Arts Council and Fife Council, which made the final realisation of Alex Paterson's dream possible.
It is to be hoped that the new national theatre will allow productions by regional theatres such as the Byre and those in Perth and Pitlochry to be seen throughout Scotland and perhaps internationally under the national theatre's banner. That has already happened with the Byre productions of plays such as "Tally's Blood" and "Parking Lot in Pittsburgh". I hope that taking such productions around the country will enhance attendance levels and the reputations of regional theatres.
I welcome the fact that the new theatre will create additional work for actors, writers and production staff and will help to alleviate the brain drain of creative talent from Scotland. Many of us remember the recent departure of Hamish Glen from Dundee Rep to England because of a lack of funding for theatre in Scotland.
Theatres such as the Byre will benefit in their role as important contributors to the local economy from the raised profile that the national theatre should create. However, those benefits are conditional for all producing companies on maintaining the proper funding balance. The new Byre is in its third season and continues to learn how to absorb the long-term cost of running a producing theatre. Its ability to maintain a high quality of productions depends on core funding that is adequate for the task.
I welcome the announcement of £7.5 million of funding to cover the new national theatre's first two years of existence, but it is essential that that funding is truly additional and is not obtained in part by restricting funding to the 10 existing regional companies. The Scottish Arts Council suggests that it will provide standstill funding for the Byre for 2004-05 without allowance for inflation. That would be a real-terms reduction in funding.
The new national theatre's reputation as a commissioning organisation will depend wholly on the existence of a pool of producing companies that are in good financial health. We shall watch extremely carefully to ensure that our regional theatres are not starved of funds if prevailing economic winds mean that the national theatre's survival should threaten their health.
I note that funding is in place only for the first two years of the national theatre's existence. The Byre's experience suggests that a minimum of three years is necessary to allow productions to be commissioned, developed and presented. Continuity of funding and confidence is essential.
We welcome the extra funding, but no one should forget that countries such as Denmark and Finland allocate far more public funding to their theatre than this country does. Last year, the Scottish Arts Council administered a total theatre budget of £7.4 million, which the Executive funded in full. Denmark spends that on its children's theatre alone.
In addition to asking for continuing support for provincial theatres, we welcome the Executive's undertaking to help to develop young talent and to support local authorities and others that bring cultural opportunities to cities, regions and places such as Kirkcaldy's Adam Smith Theatre, which we believe could benefit from the funding that has been discussed.
On a personal note, and as I successfully lobbied a previous Conservative Administration to provide a special television fund to promote Gaelic programming, I sincerely hope, and take on board the minister's assurance, that the distinctive drama and culture of Gaeldom will be emphasised by the new national theatre. I look for an undertaking from the minister on that point.
It is grand to hear so much consensus in the chamber and I welcome it. It is high time that we invested in the artistic and creative talents of young people in Scotland. It is essential to invest not only in established talent but in the talent that is tapped only in our regions and smaller communities by voluntary groups, for example, in places where the only theatre that many young people have seen is the operating theatre in which they were born, which they and their mothers fairly quickly forgot. We need the will and the investment to identify and nurture the ability that is out there.
That brings me to accessibility. A national theatre must be exactly that—national. It must be like Heineken and reach the parts that other theatres do not reach. Funding must also be available, so that local facilities can be used by touring productions at affordable prices. Ticket prices must be affordable to those who do not currently attend such venues. I commend the attempt that was made during the Edinburgh festival to encourage young people to see the production of "The Ring". The fact that this year's attempt was not as successful as it could have been does not mean that the idea should not be encouraged and tried again next year.
If we are to make the new theatre accessible to young people, they will have to be able to afford to go to it. In Moscow, I saw students getting access to theatre productions for under a pound; the place was always packed. However, cheap does not mean poor. I remind members of the play "Gagarin Way", which used few props and little scenery and was a huge success—it toured the country and was put on in all sorts of venues. It is an outstanding play; I am just glad that I have lived in Fife long enough to understand even half of it.
Accessibility does not mean simply affordability or the opportunity for everyone to participate—it also means that something must be relevant and understandable. In governance and in the public sector in Scotland, we talk a language that is not necessarily relevant to those on whose behalf we speak. If members would like an example of drama that draws that point to everyone's attention, I commend to them Vaclav Havel's "The Memorandum", which is a superb play about the nonsense of imposing linguistic styles on institutions. Members should read it, if they get the opportunity.
Using language that it is accessible and easy to understand will be one of the biggest challenges that the new theatre will face. I agree that it is essential that we do not lose the drive for quality that the national theatre must be about, but people will want to see theatre that reflects their experiences and lifestyles. I remember my own upbringing in Dublin. We had the Abbey Theatre and the Gate Theatre, where we saw Beckett, Synge and Yeats, but we also had access to the Taibhearc—the Irish language theatre in Galway—which produced superb work. There were also pantomimes in a mixture of Irish and English that were a riot. I also recall many Irish plays that caused riots in the streets. The tradition of knocking the establishment is one that the establishment should encourage. I hope that, in its artistic life, the new theatre will do so.
The formation of a national theatre will also help to play a part in ensuring the implementation of "A Smart, Successful Scotland". Access to and participation in the theatre and the arts will mean more articulate and more confident young people. We all get up on our feet and expound, but we did not get to be like that naturally—we were all encouraged, or at least I hope that we were.
I hope that the theatre will not be reserved to the luvvies and those who already have access, but will encourage our painters, our musicians and our back-scenes technical staff, because they are as essential as those who stand on the stage and perform. I hope that ministers will make a commitment that the technical aspects of productions will not be forgotten and will also receive investment.
Like many other members, I welcome the Executive's commitment to create a national theatre for Scotland. It represents a great opportunity for the arts, which I am sure will be welcomed by all those who work within the arts, as well as by everyone in Scotland who cares about the future of the arts, especially theatre.
Like many other members, my interest in the theatre was stimulated by the Citizens Theatre in Glasgow. In my younger days, particularly when I was a student, I got the cheap seats and went to watch many productions, some of which were marvellous.
I want to pick up on Ted Brocklebank's point about Gaelic. We want productions not only in Gaelic but in lots of local dialects. Some of the greatest theatre experiences that I had were of the Molière plays that were performed in Scots, in many of which I think Liz Lochhead was involved, perhaps as long ago as 20 years ago. The fact that plays that were very old and had come from France were a marvellous entertainment when they were translated into the Scots dialect made a tremendous impact on me.
For me, like Colin Fox, one of the most seminal moments in my experience of the theatre was "The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil". Most of us feel that that was a seminal moment not just for us personally but for theatre in Scotland generally.
If I may make a discordant comment for a moment, I cannot support the phrase in the Tory amendment that asks the Parliament to state that it
"regrets the Executive's past failure to deliver on its promises".
The Executive fails to deliver on many things. Quite frankly, after 60 years, when we are at the very point where we are finally about to achieve a national theatre, it is not appropriate or necessary to make such a negative statement. I welcome what the Executive has done.
When Joyce McMillan discussed the possibility of the establishment of a national theatre, she said:
"They … must not do it on the cheap. If they are going to launch something that is labelled a national theatre, the worst possible thing is to do it half-heartedly."
I am sure that we would all agree that it is essential that the national theatre is based on a secure foundation. That means that Scotland needs a secure regional theatre structure with secure funding in place. I know that, over the past few years, a lot of money has gone into regional theatre to try to create that stability, but we need it for the future as well. In 2002, Liz Lochhead made a similar point:
"If the Scottish Theatre was to be a cosmetic crown upon a rotten tooth underneath that would be a terrible thing".
I hope that the minister accepts that there are genuine worries about the future funding of the theatre and about what happens when the next crisis occurs. Will the money allocated to the national theatre be used once again to pay for the regional theatres? Perhaps the minister will enlighten us on that point.
I understand that it has been announced that the funding for the national theatre has been allocated from end-year flexibility. What will happen in a year in which no such flexibility is available? What will happen to the Scottish national theatre, or indeed the regional theatres, when the Treasury in London decides to cut the money. That brings us to one of the central problems. No matter what we do, without financial autonomy the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government will always be dependent on what the London Treasury decides. Labour members might not like it, but any cuts in the block grant will mean that the Scottish Government will need to cut services. We have seen in the recent past how the first cut was to the plans for the national theatre. What is the likelihood that the same thing will not happen again? What promises for future funding are in place? Where is the future stability of funding that the national theatre needs? What is the long-term plan to put the funding of the regional theatres on a stable footing? I hope that we will get some answers when the minister responds at the end of the debate.
Small independent European countries allocate much more public money to the provision of theatre than is provided in Scotland. Does anyone really say that because those countries fund theatre, they are unable to provide an adequate health service? Of course not. The Government has often said that we cannot have both, but members of the arts world would disagree. As Roseanna Cunningham said when she quoted Iain Reekie, who is head of drama and performance at Queen Margaret University College, the argument that if we fund a theatre we cannot fund a hospital bed is daft. It is no long-term solution to the funding of the arts in Scotland to have a policy that is based on robbing Peter to pay Paul. The arts in Scotland, including the national theatre and the regional theatres, need to be adequately funded. They need stability in their future funding in order to plan ahead.
The artistic community has spoken out loudly about that lack of stable and adequate funding. I quote again from Liz Lochhead, who said earlier this year:
"the Citizens is in a terrible state, but to make matters worse, proportionately they get more money than many other theatres".
Mark Thomson, who is the artistic director of the Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, said that the funding shortage
"poses a serious threat to the standards and quality of theatre".
Those matters need to be addressed.
I will finish with one further quote, which comes from James Boyle of the Scottish Arts Council:
"Let's have a national theatre and let's have the full funding stream. The arts will repay the country in full measure."
I whole-heartedly agree with James Boyle on that point. The real question is whether the Government agrees with him.
Well, three years and three—or is it four?—arts ministers later, we are here. We have the funding for a national theatre. As the person who was the first arts minister and who, along with Donald Dewar, launched the first ever national cultural strategy, which had a commitment to develop a national theatre, I very much welcome that.
The £7.5 million that the minister announced is a great amount of money for the project. Like many others, I want to see a long-term commitment to the national theatre, but I believe that we will get that from the Executive. It was important that we got the theatre right and talked to and listened to the theatre community. As many others have done, I pay tribute to the Federation of Scottish Theatre and the work put in by Heather Baird, Hamish Glen, Kenny Ireland, Giles Havergal and theatre critic Joyce McMillan. A lot of work has been put into the project over the years.
Regional theatre has had a tough time, although I was glad that the Executive ensured that money was put into it last year.
Let us not talk Scottish theatre down. There is a wonderful Scottish theatre community out there. Scottish theatre is alive and well and performing. We have great Scottish playwrights in Scotland, such as David Greig, John Clifford, Liz Lochhead and David Harrower. Wonderful plays are being produced. I do not have to list all of them, but we also have great theatre companies and I would like to mention one that I have taken particular pleasure from watching in recent years: a young and vibrant theatre company called Suspect Culture.
I echo the request for the Scottish national theatre to be accessible. It has to be a truly national theatre. One of my earliest Scottish theatre experiences was in a packed Dingwall town hall when the 7:84 Theatre Company performed "The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil". That theatre group blazed a trail in getting round all Scotland, to rural and urban communities that did not normally go to the theatre. I echo the request for our national theatre to be accessible to all communities in Scotland, including those that do not normally go to the theatre.
On leaving university, my first job was with the Citizens Theatre in Glasgow. I remember a much younger, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed Giles Havergal, who has recently retired after many years at the Citizens and to whom I pay tribute. He made a huge difference to the accessibility of Scottish theatre. I remember that one of the first productions that Giles Havergal put on was called "The Cenci", which involved a lot of nudity. As someone who worked in front of house, I was kept extremely busy by a huge number of Glaswegian gentlemen in macs and many upset Newton Mearns matriarchs. Giles Havergal certainly blazed a trail in Glasgow with his revolutionary ticket pricing and the theatre in Scotland owes a great debt of gratitude to him and the rest of his team.
I emphasise that Scottish culture as a whole is alive and well. Today is a great day for Scottish culture as well as for Scottish theatre. I pay tribute to the Scottish theatre community and look forward to the first performance of the Scottish national theatre. I know that Donald Dewar would have liked to have been there.
I declare an interest as a member of the Writers' Guild of Great Britain, the Scottish Society of Playwrights and a lapsed member of Equity.
I have two responses to the minister's comments. First, I hope that he will join me in congratulating Donald Smith, who is in the gallery, on his work in realising the project. Secondly, the minister mentioned the role of women in Scottish theatre. With the exceptions of Sue Wilson at Pitlochry Festival Theatre and Joan Knight at Perth Theatre, not one building-based theatre company in Scotland has had a women as artistic director in the past 30 years, despite the large number of first-rate women directors there are on the scene. Clearly, theatre is an area in which a very real glass ceiling operates. I trust that the national theatre company will take that issue on board.
The Scottish Green Party warmly welcomes the announcement. It is a real achievement that the Scottish Parliament is to deliver a national theatre company. We look for a commitment from the Executive that it will continue to fund the national theatre and not let it die for a ha'p'orth of tar—or a ha'p'orth of funding—as happened to its predecessor company some 20 years ago.
We welcome the fact that the theatre is to be a commissioning body and not a new building. To be inclusive, the company must be capable of producing work for all of our theatres, from the Mull Theatre to the Edinburgh Festival Theatre and everywhere from the beach at Ayr to a pub in Galashiels.
However, the Executive must look further than the national theatre; it must also look to the funding of the Scottish regional theatres. For example, the Edinburgh Royal Lyceum Theatre Company received £828,000 from central Government funds whereas Nottingham Playhouse received £1.2 million and the Manchester Royal Exchange received £2 million. Grade 2 theatres are similarly poorly represented when one compares their position with that of similar English theatres.
Local authority funding is not helping the situation. The average Scottish local authority spend has increased by 13 per cent in the past seven years while inflation over the period has been 18 per cent.
I am about to run out of time. I will finish by saying that theatre is not all about directors; it is primarily about actors. I believe that the Presiding Officer has persuaded Sean Connery to be the voice of the lifts at Holyrood. I am not sure whether Sean Connery's voice will fill the lifts of the new Parliament, but I am convinced that if we can bring actors of that calibre back to Scotland, we will fill the national theatre of Scotland.
We move to closing speeches. We are exactly on time. Members must stick to the times that are allocated to them.
I welcome the debate. It is fitting that our concerns, questions and inquiries about where we go from here are added to the welcome that we have given to the announcement of the Scottish national theatre. I am sure that the minister will take those concerns, questions and inquiries in the spirit in which they were meant to be taken.
All of the contributions have highlighted the fact that there is a great responsibility on and expectation of the Scottish national theatre. The next few decisions that are taken will be crucial. The decision about who is engaged is crucial, as they will have to make the strategic decisions to get the right balance between a host of competing but by no means mutually exclusive demands.
A number of members spoke about excellence in production and the widest possible involvement. Donald Gorrie and Elaine Murray touched on the hope—it is more than a hope—that the national theatre does not become a plaything of the existing theatre companies, but takes on the right spirit and becomes a plaything for all of Scotland. It must become a national theatre company that belongs to all of us.
As the minister knows, I have been involved in an initiative called the Edinburgh people's festival. Part of the aim of the festival was to take the world's greatest arts festival out to those who do not feel that the Edinburgh international festival is for them or is part of them. I am sure that the minister would agree that the national theatre should inhabit some of that territory. A number of members addressed that issue.
I am sure that all of us have considered the impact that "Trainspotting" had on a generation of youngsters who immediately took up books, having not done so before. I am sure that the minister welcomes, as we all welcomed, the impact that "Gagarin Way" had last year. Christine May is not in the chamber, but I am sure that she would agree that the play had a great impact on Fife, as it was set in a mining community in Fife.
I realise that the question of how to engage our young people in theatre is complex. Maureen Macmillan highlighted that point. With the right spirit and the right driving force behind the national theatre, it could make a great difference. As Stewart Maxwell said, ticket pricing and the accessibility of the production if it is put on in a city-centre location are related issues. If productions are put on in local community centres, local people get the feeling that the production is partly for them—people feel involved in a way that does not happen in a city-centre location. Subject matter is another one of the complex issues that is involved in the debate on this complex subject. We must also recognise that, in many working-class communities in Scotland, people sometimes feel that there is an invisible bouncer outside the theatre. I am sure that the minister agrees with that point.
During the Edinburgh people's festival, we held a highly successful debate entitled "Whose culture is it anyway?" Former Labour party member Tommy Shepherd, whom the minister will know well and who now runs The Stand comedy club, made the telling remark that there is no problem in getting youngsters to attend music events or to participate in stand-up comedy either on stage or in the audience, but the problems begin when we try to get youngsters and people from a working-class background to believe that the theatre is as much for them as it is for anyone else. I am sure that those involved with the national theatre for Scotland will examine that question.
On behalf of the Scottish Socialist Party, I wish the national theatre well and hope that it achieves the objectives that have been set. I hope that it lives up to the notion of accessibility that I outlined in my amendment, because the very idea represents the spirit of Scotland.
I will end on the note of consensus that Christine May mentioned, and hope that we all hope that the national theatre of Scotland gives the establishment a kicking every chance it gets.
As we have heard, the national theatre for Scotland is not all about bricks and mortar. Instead, it has been structured as a commissioning agency to promote arts, culture, music and drama throughout Scotland, and will also play a key role in commissioning productions that will go on tour around the country. Such a responsibility is awesome.
In doing that, the theatre must adopt a much more enlightened approach and extend its vision of the arts beyond the M8 corridor, where everything seems to stop. It must not be allowed to remain in the rhythm of promoting productions within the central belt at the expense of our rural and peripheral areas.
Promoting the arts in the rural settings of the Highlands and Islands requires substantial finance, although I know that the budget has been enhanced in that respect. We must also give a proper hearing to the promotion and support of productions from the Highlands and Islands where culture, music and drama have distinct and strong roots. For example, Shetland's Up-Helly-Aa, with its fire festival, has stood the test of time for centuries and, within a couple of weeks, we will celebrate the national Mòd in Oban, where the first Mòd was established 100 years ago. It is clear that a lot of tradition and culture exists.
On the subject of what is traditionally Scottish, I should mention that last week a delegation from Scotland travelled to Barcelona to promote culture, language, music and all the rest of it. After speaking to our illustrious minister, we were able to include a Gaelic element in that delegation. Much of what is thought of as being traditionally Scottish has its roots in the Gaelic culture. The riches of Gaelic culture and heritage are internationally recognised and appreciated. Gaelic arts and heritage provide a gateway through which non-Gaelic communities can gain and enjoy the richness of Gaelic language and culture. We have much to be proud of.
As I said at the outset, we must promote remote and rural areas. Maureen Macmillan has already referred to Highlands amateur drama groups, and I particularly remember Gaelic drama groups such as Sgudalairean and my own group Cluicheadairean Loch Aillse. We had many enjoyable nights throughout the Highlands and Islands. More Highland talent should be commissioned and given the opportunity to flourish on the world stage. That will require the commissioning agency of the national theatre for Scotland to promote all the arts, through schools, colleges and communities, to ensure that our culture, language and heritage are presented and appreciated locally, nationally and internationally.
I am sorry if I bring a rather discordant note to the debate, but I think that it is necessary so that a number of benchmarks can be laid down. Before I go on, I declare an interest as a non-paid director of 2000 & 3 Estaites theatre company.
The gratuitous part of what I have to say makes me feel rather curmudgeonly, as if Russell Hunter should be delivering this part of my speech, but there is a degree of criticism to be made. Although we welcome what the minister has announced, there is absolutely no doubt that there has consistently been a large underspend in the Scottish Executive's budget over the years. A problem with the funding of regional theatres has also needed to be addressed, and it should have been addressed by using the underspend rather than by raiding the budget that had been earmarked for the national theatre. That would have allowed us to be ahead of the game and we could have had this debate at least two years ago. By now, we could at least have had a chairman and a board. We could have been beginning to see things move.
I believe that, if it had not been for the pressure put on ministers in previous debates, such as that secured by Robin Harper, recent announcements on the establishment of a national theatre would not have been made. Elaine Murray will remember that pressure well, as will Frank McAveety, who frankly had a very hard time—to put it mildly—when he appeared on "Newsnight" and was pressed on what would happen about the national theatre. Those pressures have led to today's announcement. There was also pressure from other people—perhaps not in the chamber or in the gallery but outside the Parliament—who said that we should not have a national theatre. We should all remember that it is the pressure that we put on the Executive to deliver on the commitment that it made that has brought us here today.
There have been many attempts to establish a national theatre. Sir Stafford Cripps tried to provide the funding for a national theatre, but the proposal fell apart because Edinburgh and Glasgow were at each other's throats. Ludovic Kennedy tried to deliver a national theatre through the Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, but that dream was not realised and, in the 1980s, the Scottish Theatre Company failed at the box office. I take account of the many speeches that have been made with which I agree and of that history, but I want to voice my concerns.
Excellence is crucial. Without excellence, the national theatre company will not deserve to exist. We have good, often excellent, regional theatre, but a national theatre company is about trying to provide consistency to raise the game overall. New work must be commissioned, there must be new productions of existing work, and existing productions from regional theatres must be taken out around Scotland and internationally. Tours for regional productions might not otherwise be planned, as it is often not known how good a production is until the curtain closes.
I sound a note of caution about work load, as I am concerned that the national theatre might try to do too much, too soon. I appeal for decent rates of pay. If there is one thing that the national theatre company can do for regional theatre, it can raise the game with regard to the pay scales that its actors, technicians and production staff expect.
We must ensure that the national theatre is at arm's length. I have to say that the evidence so far is not convincing; it is worrying. The national theatre could be anywhere. The board can decide its location, as long as it is in Glasgow. Why not Dundee? The fact that it is a commissioning theatre makes the location unimportant, so it could be anywhere. It could use the facilities of the Traverse theatre company or of other companies such as Theatre Babel. The location does need to be Glasgow, and I am concerned that it is not the board that is making the decision.
I welcome the announcement. The national theatre is here at last and we can all rejoice and look forward to the curtain going up on the first production.
I call Linda Fabiani to close for the SNP. You have six minutes.
I do not know whether I will manage six minutes; my voice might disappear.
If that is the case, you might have offered some of your time to members earlier in the debate.
Before my voice disappears, I would like to say that I very much welcome the announcement and congratulate the minister on at last bringing to fruition a project for which many people have been working for some time. We very much support the motion. We also support Colin Fox's amendment, as we consider it to be exceedingly sensible and we could not put it better ourselves. I hope that the minister will take on board what the amendment says.
Members will expect me to say this, but I will say it anyway—I thought that Roseanna Cunningham made some very good points in her speech. One of them sticks out for me: her emphasis on ensuring that we include the traditional arts in our national theatre. That is extremely important. Only a couple of weeks ago, the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport and I had a wonderful evening together participating in some of Scotland's traditional arts. However, I suspect that that was not nearly as much fun as what Maureen Macmillan and the minister will share later.
It is important that the national theatre takes on board the point that it should represent all the languages and cultures within Scottish society. For example, with reference to my own background, lots of immigrants from Italy have settled in this country and have brought with them a love of opera. I would say that Italian opera is certainly the best in the world. I think that Colin Fox might agree with me, as he is a big opera buff. We have many cultures in Scotland and we should reflect those within our national theatre set-up.
Another point that Roseanna Cunningham made and that other members have mentioned is the fact that theatre can happen anywhere; it does not have to take place on a stage or in a building. When Roseanna spoke about the production of "The Enchanted Forest" that she is going to, it reminded me of a production that I went to in Glen Lyon a couple of years ago, called "The Path". I do not know whether any other members went to it. It was a wonderful experience—one of the best theatrical experiences that I have had in my life. That was theatre that took place right through the valley of Glen Lyon.
Unfortunately, I did not hear all of Jamie McGrigor's speech—it is not that I walked out on Jamie; I just did not want to drown his erudition with all my coughing. However, I understand from what some members have said that he was a bit ungracious. I certainly think that Brian Monteith was a bit ungracious in his closing remarks, which is so unlike him. Before I left the chamber, one comment I heard Jamie McGrigor make was his little dig at the Holyrood building. The Conservatives seem to have a little dig at it every time they get on their feet these days.
Donald Gorrie said that we should perhaps consider the Holyrood building as a venue for theatre. I have also considered that idea. Rob Gibson mentioned that he saw a production of "Ane Satyre of the Thrie Estaitis" in this chamber. Perhaps we should look forward to having a production of "The Four Estaitis" at the new Holyrood building. We could include the press in that.
I hope that I am giving Linda Fabiani a chance to rest her voice. Given that we are no longer four estates but seven estates in this Parliament, would Linda Fabiani consider increasing her generosity on the production size?
I think that we will stick to four; it is complicated enough.
Some years ago, I saw a Scottish Youth Theatre production called "The Four Estates" in the Cottier Theatre in Glasgow. That is a wonderful place. Glasgow is an ideal place to create the resource centre for the national theatre. That, too, is welcomed.
I pay tribute to youth theatre, because it has come up with some wonderful productions over the years. I have also been at many amateur productions over the years and the talent that is in amateur theatre is immense. There is also special needs theatre—people have set up theatre groups so that people with special needs can express themselves. I hope that the national theatre embraces some of those initiatives.
Colin Fox mentioned the fact that many young people will go to music productions, but they will not go to theatre productions. Many excellent theatre productions have been combined with music. One that comes to mind is "Sunset Song", for which Michael Marra did some wonderful music. Such a combination of music and theatre can be developed in an effort to attract young people to the theatre.
I will close, because I am finding it difficult to continue as I am losing my voice. I was fascinated by the Scots rap that Elaine Murray mentioned and I invite the minister to conclude the debate in rap.
That is entirely a matter for the minister. He should note that he has nine minutes in which to respond to the debate.
I will resist the temptation.
Linda Fabiani's throat was rather sore. Perhaps the result this week might be closer than we expect if she has had to work the phones overnight on behalf of her esteemed leader. That remains to be seen.
I welcome the positive comments that have been made. Conservative members have shown a genuine commitment to wanting the national theatre to work as effectively and imaginatively as possible for the people of Scotland. As the minister with responsibility for the matter, I give my assurance that we will move forward.
Many questions have been asked about intention. We have an opportunity to design a match, to play it on a brand new pitch and to achieve wonderful success. All the voices that we have heard this afternoon should be part of the broader debate that the chair and board of the national theatre will want to develop. It is important that we move forward effectively.
Many members have mentioned their experiences of drama. I am probably too young to remember "The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil", but I welcome what older colleagues, such as Colin Fox, have said. However, political dramas of the 1970s are not the only dramas that have shaped much of what we are today. Many people have been influenced by their first exposure to European and Scottish writers and to American dramatists. We want to ensure that Scottish writers have at least an equivalence within choices that are available in school curriculums. That can be encouraged only if we create a space for the young generation of male and female writers that is emerging in Scotland. Youngsters who might be inspired by the theatre—or the many other activities in which the Executive is engaging—can be inspired to be the voices that speak for Scotland in the future.
Last week's visit to Catalonia has been mentioned. In many respects, Catalonia is a nation similar to Scotland. I spoke to many folk who are involved in cultural development there and it is interesting that the public perception is that much work is driven by public investment. However, the model is very different: it is driven by public investment and voluntary commitment, evidenced by what was said earlier. In Catalonia, there was a rejection of the state well before Franco. That rejection was exacerbated by the conduct of the fascist state for 50 years. People had to develop autonomous means of creative expression. That represents an opportunity for all of us. No member has ownership of creative expression, but we can certainly contribute to it. We have an opportunity to make a difference.
That is why I welcome the work of colleagues such as Dr Elaine Murray, who previously had to step up to the plate and wear a hard hat when members chucked comments at her about investment in regional theatre. We have invested in regional theatre. In the past couple of years, we have given more than 30 per cent new money in order to stabilise regional theatre. That money is new, additional money from end-year flexibility. However, like Christmas and puppies, the commitment that we need to make is for life. We need to ensure that spending reviews show a commitment to ensuring that the national theatre continues. That will be part of our continuing debate. The commitment that has been given this afternoon demonstrates that we believe that the national theatre is one of the central elements of our cultural investment.
I have listened intently to the minister. It is useful that the Minister for Finance and Public Services is here. Is the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport saying that he will argue the corner, and that not only will the national theatre receive underspend funding, but that there will be an adjustment to the budget of the Scottish Arts Council in recognition of the fact that a national theatre has been founded and that more funding is therefore needed?
We have said that, through end-year flexibility, we have been able to realise the resource, which is larger than it initially was during discussions with the theatre community. That is welcome. We have recognised that, as part of that development, such funding will be part of our wider fabric of support for the arts. Therefore, any minister with responsibility for the arts—which I currently have—will argue the corner for such funding support. Other Administrations have ignored investment in a national theatre for many years and I am delighted that such investment has been welcomed by many people. That is an important development.
A previous leader of the Conservative party, when asked to name her favourite writers, claimed that she always reached for the novels of Frederick Forsyth. In terms of major literature, I need say no more about her choice.
We want to give broad support to ensure that the national theatre reflects Scotland's diverse communities. That support is not about replacing or supplanting existing funding streams; it is about the additional element that the national theatre can provide to those streams. The fact that the national theatre will be a commissioning theatre means that it will assist many regional theatres. I could not name them all. I know that members would like me to have named each and every one, but that would have taken at least the opening 10 to 12 minutes of the debate.
I hope that, if people have vision and imagination and there is genuine partnership with the national theatre, a dialogue will emerge that will strengthen regional theatres and the national theatre and ensure that we develop what is already a vibrant theatre sector in Scotland.
The Executive supports not only investment in the national theatre, but complementary investments that will ensure that the national theatre will be a hallmark for cultural investment in Scotland over the next few years.
I recognise what Rhona Brankin said about how theatre can be made meaningful for local people. I deny that I was one of the macs in the front row for the Citizens' Theatre production to which she referred.
Maureen Macmillan said that she would like to see Ewan McGregor perform under canvas in the Highlands. I imagine that he has probably done that already in a private capacity rather than a public one.
It is important that members have welcomed the development of a national theatre. With the appointment of a new chair in the next few months, we have the space to make a difference to the theatre's future. The national theatre must reflect what Jeremy Raison said at the Citizens' Theatre when he was asked what he wanted to do there when he took over from Giles Havergal. I should declare a constituency interest in the Citizens, although it is in the Gorbals area of Glasgow. Jeremy Raison indicated that what he wanted for the Citizens' Theatre was:
"High production values; fascinating, interesting, challenging, amusing, world-changing work. … Let's be bold."
There was reference in the debate to the Minister for Finance and Public Services' commitment to the Executive's national theatre initiative, which is testimony to his commitment to theatre and culture. He has demonstrated a larger commitment in that respect than any previous finance minister in Scotland.
We recognise that the national theatre must connect with communities throughout Scotland. Brian Monteith said that he was disappointed by the fact that the national theatre will be located in the greater Easterhouse area. I make it absolutely clear that the location will be an important, but not central, part of the national theatre's work. The location is about the site for the administrative headquarters. It is wiser to consider the fact that many parts of Scotland have recognised that the arts can play a part in economic regeneration.
If we genuinely want the Parliament to say something to communities that have been excluded for far too long and that have felt that the arts, in Colin Fox's words, are not about them, then we will demonstrate that we can complement the arts factory that the greater Easterhouse area has established. I believe that there is no more fitting place than Easterhouse for the location of the national theatre, given that it is part of our largest city and looks east to the capital city. Easterhouse is the part of Glasgow that is closest to Edinburgh.
The national theatre will be located in Easterhouse in recognition of the work that has already been done there. However, that work will be only a snapshot of the work that will be done with the repertory theatres and companies in the Highlands and Islands. More important, over the next few years, new theatre companies will emerge because of the inspiration and vision contained in the national theatre.
The establishment of the national theatre will allow us to say that we have created something that makes an important point about Scotland. The creation of a national theatre shows that we value who we are and that we recognise what we can say and that future generations will have something to say about theatre and expression.
I am delighted that there has been widespread support throughout the Parliament for the national theatre. I hope that the Parliament will similarly acclaim and support other aspects of the Labour and Liberal Democrat partnership deal that will be presented over the next few years. I thank members for their time and commend the motion to them.